Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesNarrative ReviewPubMed

Fat Grafting and Regenerative Medicine in Burn Care.

Alessandri Bonetti M., Piccolo NS., Rubin JP., Egro FM.

Narrative Review on Chronic Wound, Burns, Scar, Chronic Inflammation, published in Clin Plast Surg (2024) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.

Open my reading list
Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesEvidence level of this study

Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.

  • Level A · Stronger Clinical Evidence
  • Level B · Emerging clinical evidence with positive signals
  • Level C · Early human research exploring benefits
  • Level D · Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studies
  • Emerging · Emerging topic under active research
Read the A–D evidence level guide

This page is generated from the PubMed record. The Thai description is an automated summary of bibliographic fields and the abstract, not a full translation, and is not medical advice.

Study type
Narrative Review
Journal
Clin Plast Surg (2024)
Country
United States
Reported sample size
—
Source database
PubMed
PMID
38789152
DOI
10.1016/j.cps.2024.02.006
Citations
4

Abstract (original English)

Regenerative therapies such as fat grafting and Platelet Rich Plasma (PRP) have emerged as new options to tackle burn-related injuries and their long-term sequelae. Fat grafting is able to promote wound healing by regulating the inflammatory response, stimulating angiogenesis, favoring the remodeling of the extracellular matrix, and enhancing scar appearance. PRP can enhance wound healing by accelerating stages including hemostasis and re-epithelization. It can improve scar quality and complement fat grafting procedures. Their cost-effectiveness, minimal invasiveness, and promising results observed in the literature have made these tools as therapeutic candidates. The current evidence on fat grafting and PRP in acute and reconstructive burns is described and discussed in this study.

What this study does not prove

  • • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.
  • • This is a narrative review: it collects no new patient data and does not systematically appraise evidence quality.

Evidence level

Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.

How we grade evidence
HumansAdipose TissueBurnsPlastic Surgery ProceduresPlatelet-Rich PlasmaRegenerative MedicineWound Healing

Browse all related research

Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.

Related research